What are the odds that OMFV will be the best IFV of its generation just like the Bradley was? Gotta be close to 100% right
What are the odds that OMFV will be the best IFV of its generation just like the Bradley was?
What are the odds that OMFV will be the best IFV of its generation just like the Bradley was? Gotta be close to 100% right
It will be the best IFV of its generation because it is American unironically. Yuros can rant and rave about "muh innovative tech" but at the end of the day a small fleet of Yuro IFVs won't accomplish anything on a real battlefield against a near-peer
My thoughts exactly. Not only did the Bradley outmatch IFVs of its time technologically, but also numerically. 8000 were produced and only around 150 ever destroyed
Good luck in ukraine with real opponents not some sand morons with aks.
Thanks it will do fine against vodka morons with AKs. Why is Bradley seethe so common? What is it about excellent chain guns coupled with integrated atgms making people feel so inferior
People like
fail to understand that it is not the vehicle itself, but how it is used.
If people want to see how 'the Bradley' would be used in Ukraine, then look at The Gulf War and how hundreds, if not thousands of armoured Bradleys, Abrams and SPGs pushed through vast tracks of Kuwait and Iraq.
Now do that in Ukraine and the war will be over in 2 months.
>some sand morons with aks
Russia has no standing to criticize Middle-Eastern armies after the 4th Guards Tank Army put up a worse fight than Saddam's Republican Guard.
as a bong all i want is for us to give all our challengers to ukraine and spin up a tank pact with the US where we use abrams with some manufacturing/repair facility investment in the UK, and basically the same for ajax
Warriortard, no bong would say this come on now
Im actually pessimistic about the OMFV because it's a rushed program and everything is OTS. No new technologies, no really new capabilities, nothing that says "this is next generation".
It's going to turn out just like the MPF and deliver an overweight piece of shit whose only real advantage over the existing platform is that the chassis doesn't have as much mileage on it.
What exactly is rushed about it?
>No new technologies, no really new capabilities, nothing that says "this is next generation".
fused smart ammunition. It will be usefull for drones and infantry behind cover
>It's going to turn out just like the MPF and deliver an overweight piece of shit whose only real advantage over the existing platform is that the chassis doesn't have as much mileage on it.
Neither are in service so you’re generalizations are mostly baseless.
>(You) retard
>Everything is OTS
So is the B-21, it recycles F-22 and F-35 bits and avoided a costly development cycle while producing a capable platform
>MPF
>Overweight
Final weight looks like it got optimized so it can cross bridges that the Abrams would stress
>chassis
ASCOD has been around since the early 2000s
Irons Fist and 50mm Supershot tare new tech.
>no really new capabilities
APS is new capability and such capability lags behinds demand.
>Im actually pessimistic about the OMFV because it's a rushed program and everything is OTS
Stopped reading.
How is the program rushed when it was cancelled twice and restarted twice. It's been going for decades at this point.
"OTS", yeah Lynx, Redback and BAE 'OMFV' are "OTS". CV90 and Griffin 3 might be partially based on an existing frame, but that's it.
>Im actually pessimistic about the OMFV because it's a rushed program
If you are going to wumao blackpill don't start with painting yourself as an absolute retard.
Too tall
>just like the Bradley was
lol
God damn the Bradley is based but I don’t think you can argue it’s still the best. Best of its time by a long shot and still extremely capable but the modern German ones beat it out
>Germans cucked out on integral ATGM
Where are my CV90MKIV bros at to laugh at the Germs?
40mm was a cope cannon. Sweden chose it because they are the worlds leading producer of 40mm and they had a ton laying around. No other IFV uses 40mm. You will never change this fact. Pumps is superior to CV90
Puma is superior*
nothing personal kid but
>breaks down
Crew comfort is extremely important in an IFV. The CV-90 has a very cramped troop compartment. You don’t want your soldiers twisted up in the fetal position for hours at a time and then let expect them to assault a position
>inb4 it’s not THAT bad
Keep saying that Emil
Fat boy on the left could use a few more laps on foot and laying off a few pints of the chunky monkey. I'm sure his crewmates would appreciate the few inches extra leg room.
Serious talk warriorfag, Where is the source of "THE CV90 IS TOO CRAMPED" I cant find anything of it, the one thing i know is when they fitted the new turret it went from 8 to 7 men and not a single note of your claim is to be found.
It hasn't been noticeably smaller for decades, but now that the CV90 and Bradley are being replaced with bigger, heavier boxes, yeah, CV90 and Bradley are considered 'smol' and 'cramped'.
>Sweden chose it because they are the worlds leading producer of 40mm and they had a ton laying around
>The CV-90 has a very cramped troop compartment
These always give me a chuckle, its like reading Gavin-posting for the first time
Sure thing erik
Both statements are rooted in truth
It never was and never will be, you're just mad no one wants to buy your be all-end all private venture POS.
Why do CV90 posters have such a hard time dealing with reality
>http://www.ointres.se/projekt_strf90.htm
The guy who wrote this was literally one of the project managers for the CV90. I'm gonna believe him more then some neckbeard on PrepHole
Den gamla goda tiden när det gick att göra riktade upphandlingar... projektet hade aldrig varit möjligt idag
Wow a project manager defending his project. Truly groundbreaking stuff. Like I said earlier it smacks of “we investigated ourselves and found no wrongdoing”
So all bongs are blindly nationalistic ignorant to reason? That paints British posters in a terrible light.
As a bong, Challenger needs replacing but there's no point at the moment. There's no requirement to even field MBTs in British operations and we could scrap it entirely.
What Britain REALLY needs is a fleet of domestically produced 8x8s of varying degrees, a lawsuit to fuck over GD for the Ajax bullshit and adoption of another tracked multi-role that can replace CVR-T entirely which clearly Ajax can't because it exists for the purpose of deafening it's crew.
If BAE weren't such gays to work with, they could supply both and domestically produce them through the CV-90MKIV and Iveco SuperAV but hey ho, eternal shitpit for their garden gnomery over the past 2 decades.
>What Britain REALLY needs is a fleet of domestically produced 8x8s of varying degrees,
Why do they need to be domestically produced? This is an honest question.
Because its retarded to not be able to repair, supply and maintain your own fleet of vehicles. Look at what's happened with Germany over Ukraine and how relying on an international provider of arms does.
It's better to have a domestic procurement and production base of all arms so you aren't actively at the whims of some nation who might cut supplies.
The British military isn’t that large. It makes more sense to buy off the shelf and open production lines for the spare parts. From the outside it looks like an issue of national pride over function
>Wow a project manager defending his project
A fair bit more convincing than some retard on a hentai board going "trust me bro" yes
Why do you blindly trust people acting in their own self interest?
Why would I blindly trust a hentai addict on 4chin?
You shouldn’t, but quoting one of the guys in charge of the program being discussed isn’t any sort of evidence. Of course the company man is going to say the line
>diamgrams
>official government reports by multiple agencies with sometimes opposite interest
Nah im just going to listen to somr anon with zero sources instead
You have provided no source for your claim.
Discussing vehicle design and doctrine is somewhat of a lost cause on PrepHole. You'll have a hard time getting someone to understand why the CV90 is the way it is compared to for example the Bradley, and vica versa, as it involves understanding the basic considerations behind any given design compromise.
I dont think anyone here would argue that the different needs between someone like the USMC and the US Army will not lead to different vehicle designs and considerations (amphibious abilities for example), but somehow the scandinavian doctrine of dismounted AT and high mobility in canalizing and restricted terrain influencing the CV90 design seems lost on people.
>What are the odds that OMFV will be the best IFV of its generation just like the Bradley was?
Bradley isn't the best IFV of its generation. Every other western IFV from 80's and 90's has better mobility, likely better armor and armament as well.
>40mm was a cope cannon. Sweden chose it because they are the worlds leading producer of 40mm and they had a ton laying around. No other IFV uses 40mm. You will never change this fact. Pumps is superior to CV90
Sweden chose 40mm because it has larger HE-shell and they had fuckton of obsolete 40mm anti-aircraft guns around. Originally Swedish army was supposed to get around half of CV90's armed with 25mm Bushmaster. Coldwar ended and budget got slashed.
I wouldn't be surprised if Puma has crippling amounts of krautism baked into its design. Common sense ceased to exist within bundeswehr around the time Cold War ended. Last WWII veterans were out by early 80's and people who got their training hands on from them retired in 90's. Subsequently pretty much everything they made since then has been fuck up in one way or another. Germany may have competent engineers, but ever since WWII military has not been most prestigious career and barely tolerated by majority and actually shunned by substantial and loud minority. Their recruiting base starts with mediocrity and most talented will fuck off from Bundeswehr to civilian sector if they have opportunity. People making the specifications engineers work towards may not be the best and brightest around.
>Every other western IFV from 80's and 90's has better mobility, likely better armor and armament as well.
It’s undoubtedly the best. Speed is way less important than excelent optics and integrated tow. It’s armor was lacking but not enough to offset the complete dominance going on in the Bradley turret compared to every single ifv of its generation.
Speed != mobility
>It’s undoubtedly the best.
Nope.
>Speed is way less important than excelent optics and integrated tow. It’s armor was lacking but not enough to offset the complete dominance going on in the Bradley turret compared to every single ifv of its generation.
Mobility and speed aren't same thing. Optics of Bradley aren't exceptional unless compared way older or Soviet designs. ATGM integration is mostly matter of doctrine. Pretty much only western IFV where ATGM installation was budget issue was Marder, back in 70's Krauts went with MILAN and infantry launcher on pintle mount due to budget, that was back in the day quantity was its own quality and Bundeswehr still had common sense.
Bradley has issues like hull shape that limits mobility on snow or mud. Its original armor was designed around being at least in theory amphibious, something that was armored out with survivability upgrades in 90's. Same upgrades that ditched firing ports that required specialized port firing weapon with no proper sights.
Bradley is not bad piece of kit, but it like many other American weapon systems isn't the top of the line. What makes US military best isn't individual pieces of kit or training. It is availability everything in quantity and quality no one else can't afford at that scale.
I’ve never seen cope this hard
I have never seen arguments lacking as much.
Argue against
>ATGMs bad
kek
Depends entirely on doctrine. Dismounted launchers are more flexible and provide more bang for the buck.
Lets get to Bradley its less than desirable characteristics today. You know what was missing from Bradleys sent to Ukraine? ERA. It has probably nothing to do with ERA being classified, most likely it was not installed because it overloads suspension and ruins mobility, especially off road mobility. Just the 90's armor upgrades went beyond weight what suspension was designed to handle, but didn't ruin mobility too much. Post invasion of Iraq armor upgrades including ERA may have hurt it more. AMPV, the turretless Bradley variant that is replacing remaining M113 based vehicles as ambulance, mortar carrier and command post vehicles has beefed up suspension that is unlike original Bradley designed with future upgrades in mind.
Go to sleep sparky. You are too drunk.
>Dismounted launchers are more flexible and provide more bang for the buck.
>he doesn’t have both
>It has probably nothing to do with ERA being classified, most likely it was not installed because it overloads suspension and ruins mobility, especially off road mobility
May I see a source for this
Revealed in a dream. Picrel is an ai generated image of an ERA laden Bradley on an unimproved road
>The levels of gigacope
>He doesn't realize Bradleys can carry Javelins too
>Depends entirely on doctrine. Dismounted launchers are more flexible and provide more bang for the buck.
Are you familiar with the story of the fox and the grapes?
>ATGM integration is mostly matter of doctrine.
kek his favorite Cold War era ifv doesn’t have integrated ATGMs
Contemporary IFVs at the time didn’t even have stabilized cannons. Bradley was way ahead of the pack
Cope, Hans, cope.
>Sweden chose 40mm because it has larger HE-shell and they had fuckton of obsolete 40mm anti-aircraft guns around
Literally not true, but it's not like you ever gonna accept it.
It’s merely a coincidence that the only country that uses a 40mm gun on an IFV is the country who has a huge surplus of them.
>inb4 we investigated ourselves and found no wrongdoing.
So why did the worst Koreans choose the 40mm for the k21?
South Korea isn’t an authority on military equipment
But an anemic 25mm would have been much better right?
Yea coupled with an integrated ATGM
They're not building either MKIIIs or MKIVs with 40mm retard.
I know anon. We were taking about the original CV90s with the 40 being an lolcow. CV-90s are good IFVs when chambered properly and if they have an integrated ATGM.
40mm is an option in the mark 4 version what are you talking about ?.
>"The new CV90MkIV D-series of turrets which feature a modular design offering
30/40-, 35/50 and 120mm main guns and weapon pods for integrated Anti-Tank Guided
Missiles and machine guns. The turrets are designed to support a more extensive sensor
suite integration and utilize BAE Systems’ revolutionary new iFighting™ concept. The
MkIV generation will also be the first Western IFV with a qualified Active Protection
System."
But an entire brigade of bradleys will have iron fist by 2025.
https://defense-update.com/20230105_us-army-completes-successful-iron-fist-tests-series-on-bradley-armored-fighting-vehicles.html
What does it matter whether the ATGMs are internally or externally mounted? Also Lynx eith Lance 2.0 turret has them inside the turret.
>Integrated so the commander doesn't have to fuck around outside of the turret to launch one off and only one off on the Marder.
>Guidance/sights are their own units that are sitting on the equivalent of a welded on tripod mount
For shame Mattheus
>German ones beat it out
And how many of those actually exist? Hate to sound like a "quantity over quality fag" but there comes a point numbers do matter, the U.S. has more Bradley's than most of non-warsaw Europe has IFVs put together. Even IF Bradley's are "Half as good" as say, the Lynx or Puma, they're still 10x more of them.
"General Dynamics"
The reason why the Bradley has been along so long is that the Army has failed to find a true upgrade in every program to date. They could achieve minor upgrades to the Bradley but they want a major upgrade. Will the OMFV produce this? I have no idea at all. Honestly from what I’ve seen it might be another minor upgrade.
99% chance GDLS has already been chosen with the 50mm canon.
IFVs are a failed concept. Too big and slow to serve as recon, not enough room for a full infantry squad (let alone support weapons), and too lightly armored to be a light tank. Oh, and let's add a TOW on top of it so it can LARP as a tank destroyer too.
We achieved real perfection back in 1960 with the Gavin. Cheap, flexible, infinitely modifiable for just about any (singular) role, and most importantly the troops love them.
The M113 was just a modular light APC, and those are everywhere now. The M1117 is the same weight and better in almost every way. It costs more, but there are plenty of cheaper options too.
>a less comfortable, less safe, less reliable JLTV
Where do these Cadillac Gage shills come from in 2023? Is it a boomer MP reminiscing about the 1980s or is it a zoomer who's never touched a military vehicle?
I don't know about all that but I don't follow modern or burger developments closely so I wasn't aware of the JLTV. That does basically seem like a massive upgrade to the M113 filling the same roles.
>No. built over 18,500
Damn, you guys don't mess around.
The M2 Bradley in American hands is the best IFV on the planet.
check the fucking scoreboard
I think it's more a factor of American IFV crews being the best IFV crewmen in the world alongside the Bradley being a reasonably good UFV.
Nah the Bradley itself is mediocre but the tow is excellent. So the result is a good to very good ifv.
Still export sales have been poor for the Bradley.
You just proved my point, plus exports sales are irrelevant since the US bought enough units to keep the program going for decades.
Export sales are relevant because if its so great why didn't anyone want it?
They didn't buy cv90s to buy strategic good boy points with fucking sweden
Export sales are pretty good. It was over 500 before the Croatians bought 80+ last year.
>optionally manned
>supposed to carry troops to front line
What did the army mean by this?
This is where I have issues with the current project. Gen Milley insisting on adding in the "optionally manned" part took a project that was straightforward and added unnecessary complexity. It's a niche capability that no one really wanted and set back the program by about 5 years.
>t. knower
We are arguably right on the cusp of optimally manned being the standard and it has some very obvious benefits.
>know for a fact that vehicle must be deployed to a location but there is a very high chance it gets destroyed in the process
Great now I can do that without putting a crew at risk. Kinda a no brainer
>self-driving vehicle with mad off-roading skillz to maximize number of troops on the front line as the vehicle can return without a driver in it (or in case of injured driver, bring him back and replace him)
imagine
11 dead is worse than 8 or 9 dead
As long the US Army isn't stupid enough to choose whatever trash BAE Systems is offering, which is likely to be based on the AJAX.
BAE has nothing to with with Ajax. Thats purely a General Dynamics product.
Yeah, I completely mixed up my companies here.
That’s not true. It’s designed by GD UK. Why lie about something so easy to verify
Are you illiterate? I literally said it was nothing to do with BAE.
Maybe he's differentiating between GD UK and GD.
It’s an important distinction because there is a bing shill on here claiming that general dynamics US made the Ajax
fancy reactive armor or do the shapes make for better camo as it's not flat?
No, it's to make the washing harder
>dirt sticks on better in rain, preserving natural camo
I see
If the 50mm turns out to be a good idea, then yeah it'll be pretty great.
Otherwise, it could be shit. The entire concept hinges on an intermediate sized cannon round.
why the hexagons?
Future!
But seriously, it's called TactiCam, it's designed to break up and mask a vehicles thermal signature. Not sure why hexagons in particular, I'm sure someone smarter than me could explain that.
it looks cool 🙂
how do you think they apply it? like a big blanket with the hexagons on it or are they bolted on the the vehicle
The 50mm gun is under powered.its basically a over sized grenade launcher. The AU-220m is much better and a proven round.
50mm will overmatch peer adversaries for decades.
It's pretty fucking high-caliber for an IFV.